It seems to me that when someone has something important to sell, they will do everything possible to publicize its virtues. Scott Gessler’s and Tom Tancredo’s refusal to participate in gubernatorial primary debates and other forums suggests to me that either they have nothing much to sell or perhaps they have something to hide.

Come on, guys. Don’t be shy. If you really want to be governor, let’s hear what you have to say about the issues voters care about, like jobs and the economy, income inequality, health care, the environment and fracking, immigration, marriage equality and marijuana legislation. Let your primary opponents challenge you if you are up to it. Curious voters would like to know.

Bob Kropfli, Golden

This letter was published in the Feb. 8 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here[2]. Follow eLetters[3] on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

If you’re using these “debates” to learn about candidates’ views, Mr. Kropfli, you’re doing it wrong. These aren’t debates, with a stated objective, arguments and rebuttals to reach a conclusion. They are staged events to condense nuanced views of complex issues into 30-second chunks. You will learn nothing of substance.

Better to hear them speak, read press interviews and seize opportunities to question them directly during the campaign season.

#2 Comment By peterpi On February 7, 2014 @ 7:30 pm

Good points.
But the idea of avoiding debates is “I’m above this bickering, and I’m better than my opponent. I refuse to dignify my opponent with my stellar presence.”

#3 Comment By thor On February 7, 2014 @ 10:22 pm

Tancredo said he didn’t want to debate because he didn’t want to give Democrats fodder. I will become informed the way Prima suggests. Plus, there will be ads!!!

#4 Comment By tomfromthenews On February 7, 2014 @ 10:34 pm

I thought the Republicans were all for transparency. If someone is committed to vote Republican (poor sots) they should have the opportunity to hear their potential candidates address the issues of the day.

#5 Comment By Dave52 On February 7, 2014 @ 11:13 pm

The more “bomb Mecca” Mr. T gets in front of a microphone, the better the public is served.

Gesslers’ exemplary record speaks for itself.

#6 Comment By peterpi On February 7, 2014 @ 11:41 pm

Ads? Complex issues boiled down to 15 seconds.
Ads? An opportunity for each party to slime the other as made up of despicable cads who will sell your grandmother down the river, and charge you for freight.
Ads? A slugfest to see who can spend the mostest the fastest.
Ads? If any truth is revealed, it’s an accident.

“Hickenlooper is a spineless weenie!” Brought to you by Concerned Colorado Citizens for Prosperity.
“Tancredo is a Neaderthal!” Brought to you by Diverse Individuals Valuing America

I hope you watch ads solely for their alleged entertainment potential.

#7 Comment By StillUndecided On February 8, 2014 @ 8:03 am

I think that all candidates should be forced to debate, with the questions coming from people picked at random from the audience. No preparation, no script, just put them on the spot and see how they act under fire. How the candidates respond to potentially wacko questions from the public would let us really see how they can handle themselves under pressure. We would either learn who they really are or discover that they will obfuscate and filibuster and can’t be trusted.

#8 Comment By toohip On February 8, 2014 @ 10:11 am

The reality is Tancredo and Gessler don’t have anything important to sell, they have something important. . to hide. Most of which is either no plan or a controversial (read: unpopular plan) they want to hide. A debate would bring out the truth, the reality of what these two men are truly about.

This seems to be just one more “idea” by the Republicans who realize their agenda of fear and loathing is not marketing well anymore, so they’re strategy is to find ways of hiding it, lying about it, or just denying it. A similar idea is that they realized they could not market their agenda, and started losing elections so they turned to gerrymandering and voter suppression through voter ID laws. The TeaHadi right is not your uber-left, who merely work harder at convincing the electorate of their agenda. Instead it’s the “my way or the highway” approach, be it Government shut downs or threatening the faith and credit of the United States by holding the debt ceiling hostage to get some accepted law, ACA, to be rejected through a minority hostage situation. Refusing to debate and present your ideas and abilities to serve, is hiding something more than just not some vague notion of lowering ones self to debate. Tancredo and Gessler have a long laundry list of news stories and allegations criticizing their commentary and actions through their careers. . and having to re-address this personal history is something they know is not going to serve their objective. Better to keep silent then to debate and opponent, remove all doubt of your past.

#9 Comment By irisman On February 8, 2014 @ 10:23 am

Neither of them has anything to say, and they don’t have a real agenda. If either one of them is nominated, he will rely on a strictly negative campaign against Gov. Hickenlooper and attempt to pull the wool over the voters’ eyes.

#10 Comment By toohip On February 8, 2014 @ 10:26 am

“fodder” as in exposing very bad ideas (immigration) and intolerance (towards Hispanics). And thor, puh-leze your desire to “become informed” about Gessler and Tancredo is when the campaign starts up to blindly defend them on this forum. We know you’re already . . .”informed” on who you’re voting for.

#11 Comment By Hankalish On February 8, 2014 @ 4:32 pm

What wool? Please advise of Gov. Hickenlooper’s positive attributes.

#12 Comment By Harpro208 On February 8, 2014 @ 5:33 pm

A person who won’t debate because he’s afraid what comes out of his own mouth will be used against him is a coward. Smarter than the average Bagger but still a coward.

#13 Comment By thor On February 8, 2014 @ 7:55 pm

Everything you write has some truth. A little overstated,as usual, but some truth nonetheless. Along with all you wrote,there are some ads that inform. But no matter how you get your info., political debates are the last place I would go.

#14 Comment By thor On February 8, 2014 @ 7:57 pm

“fodder” as in exposing very bad ideas (immigration) and intolerance (towards Hispanics) Toohip,intolerance by liberals will not come out at a Republican debate. But thanks for pointing out that Democrats are intolerant.

#15 Comment By Granny On February 10, 2014 @ 4:58 pm

Right, you can count on ads prepared by experts to reveal the truth(?). The idea of debates, without scripted Q&As, as one poster suggested, would reveal far more about the candidates than TV ads. Unfortunately, too many voters rely on TV ads than on personal research in making decisions on candidates and issues.

And Thor, if Tancredo believes in his message(s), why would he worry about his honest responses would only serve as fodder to the Dems rather than helping voters get to know him as a candidate?

#16 Comment By thor On February 10, 2014 @ 5:41 pm

Personal research beats watching ads or debates hands down. But honestly, how many uninformed voters watch the debates? Why do you think they are uninformed?

#17 Comment By Granny On February 10, 2014 @ 5:55 pm

Unfortunately, I fully agree. Regardless of positions taken, or party supported, I appreciate people who take the time to shape their decisions on more than ads.

That said, I see unscripted debates as a step up from ads, which typically focus only on slamming opponents as opposed to sharing ideas and proposed solutions.